[Albion] “We played them off the park…daylight robbery” etc etc

[Monkey Man]

I'll take my Brighton-tinted specs off for a second and admit that Palace played better than we did. They certainly played better against us than they did in last season's games.

We really missed Bissouma and there were times when we were hoofing the ball aimlessly and losing possession without much pressure. An off day, for the most part.

But. Palace still couldn't conjure up a goal from open play, with their world famous crowd behind them, playing a new exciting and expansive brand of football, against a Brighton side their supporters have universally decreed was very poor and will definitely finish lower than them

 

[Wardy's twin]

They were marginally the better team but we were pretty poor but organised. Performances not as pretty as last season but results better - it’s deliberate. 4 big chances in game - 2 to them (1 being a pen) and 2 to us (Welbs and the goal) - certainly not even on the same planet as both games last season. They’re just looking for something to cling to after the beautiful scenes last night Draw was fair (for once in this game).

Dunk's header? Duffy header as well as well both goal scoring chances which perhaps could have gone in .

 

[bomber130]

Thought they were the better team on the night. But so were we last year at the Amex. What goes around comes around. That was so sweet last night a dagger into their heart.

Ps loved Maupay’s celebration also Dunks finger to his lips basically telling em to shut the f up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sheebo]

Dunk's header? Duffy header as well as well both goal scoring chances which perhaps could have gone in .

Maybe yeh - just not big chances for me.

 

[albionfan37]

They reminded me a bit of how we were under gp at the start lots of pressing but all the passing was in front of our defence and if they didn’t get a pen they were never scoring even on the stats we had as many shots as them one more on target than them and 53% possession it’s hard to know what they’re bleating on about

 

[Justice]

I’m liking GP’s new outlook points are everything no one remembers if you played well and lost.

 

[Tokyohands]

I don't care what the bin dippers think, I'm still too busy laughing.

 

[Swansman]

They were better and closer to the win but it was quite marginal.

The difference looks big when the opponents are continously winning the ball on the midfield but unless you can turn that into something, it matters little. You can say that attacking, possession football contains three major steps:

1. Getting the ball
2. Creating chances
3. Scoring those chances

While Brighton managed to do well with steps one and two in the CP games (and a lot of other games...) last season, the boys usually fcked up step number three. CP are not even there yet. They've just learnt how to win the ball (for 30 minutes before the game turned even) and while that is a good start for them, it is some way from actually "playing someone off the park" and so on.

 

[Hotchilidog]

They were better and closer to the win but it was quite marginal.

The difference looks big when the opponents are continously winning the ball on the midfield but unless you can turn that into something, it matters little. You can say that attacking, possession football contains three major steps:

1. Getting the ball
2. Creating chances
3. Scoring those chances

While Brighton managed to do well with steps one and two in the CP games (and a lot of other games...) last season, the boys usually fcked up step number three. CP are not even there yet. They've just learnt how to win the ball (for 30 minutes before the game turned even) and while that is a good start for them, it is some way from actually "playing someone off the park" and so on.

Spot on. Whilst Palace did indeed win the ball a lot especially first half, they did very little with it. The Ayew chance aside I did not think they seriously challenged our goal. From a playing perspective Sanchez had a very quiet night. I think our somewhat timid and uncreative play made them look better than they were. The Palace performance was nowhere near as ‘dominant’ as ours at the Amex last season.

In the cold light of day given the very little goal threat from either side a draw was a fair reflection of the game.

 

[andy1980]

Their xG was only 1.31. Take away the pen and it’d have been only 0.55. I’ve no idea where the narrative of us being played off the park comes from.

https://understat.com/match/16435

On here it says take away the penalty and our xg was actually higher. most of their remaining xg was on Ayews miss. They seem happy with their pressing aswell, but on here we pressed more (in our defensive half anyway).

https://www.sofascore.com/football/2021-09-27

On this site most stats we either matched or bettered. If you look at the attack momentum chart although throughout the match Palace had more attacking pressure neither side attacked with much intensity except when we attacked in about the 50th minute.

 

[Worried Man Blues]

Maybe Daylight Lobbery!

 

[Gwylan]

I read that. It seemed weird.

That is essentially "palace had one chance, blocked, in the first 15 minutes, there were two chances for brighton, one maybe should/could have been a penalty, then just before half time palace scored a penalty" Brighton made changes which improved them in the second half. With 15 minutes remaining palace had their final chance at goal and put it wide, brighton then scored." Which is, I think, an accurate assessment of the match, that doesn't really tally with the pre-amble that tried to sell the idea palace woz robbed.

I think you're being unfair here. The match report was posted about 12/13 minutes after the match ended. He'd probably written most of it on the assumption of a Palace win - no-one's going to write a full report from scratch in 10 minutes. He probably had an intro and a report mapped out on his head (if not already written) and had to rethink things fast.

I think the fact that he's a Palace fan is irrelevant here -any reporter would have had something similar.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

They were better in the first half. We were better in the second half.

Draw about right.

Serious straw clutching going on from the filth

 

[sparkie]

Bizarre claims. No one was played off the park.

Palace must be usually really poor in other games if they thought that performance was so good.

 

[Klaas]

Maybe Daylight Lobbery!

Well played

 

[bhafc99]

Maybe Daylight Lobbery!

Maupaylight Lobbery

 

[Nameless]

It was as even a game as you can get, both teams fully cancelled eachother out if any team was slightly better it was the away side in the final 10-15 minutes they were looking tired and we took over. With Bissouma, Webster and Lamptey out 3 of our best players I'm happy with the point. It's because we are expected to dominate the ball against most teams around us now.

 

[Happy Exile]

I think maybe a bit of confirmation bias going on, in that after the start to our season and the credit our team have had for the style of football and results there was worry from some Palace fans that we'd embarrass them. We didn't embarrass them, therefore their bias tells them they must have played astonishingly well to cancel us out. The cold stats in the record books will show our weakened team gave their best team a fairly even contest that if anything we edged. Objective evidence-based reality beats subjective reality every time, but it'll take a while for that to sink in for them, if it ever does.

 

[trueblue]

They were decent in the first half but we looked pretty comfortable, bar a silly penalty and actually had the better chances. Second half, not much in it. They squandered the big moment... we didn't. 1-1 was probably about right.

 

[Acker79]

I think you're being unfair here. The match report was posted about 12/13 minutes after the match ended. He'd probably written most of it on the assumption of a Palace win - no-one's going to write a full report from scratch in 10 minutes. He probably had an intro and a report mapped out on his head (if not already written) and had to rethink things fast.

I think the fact that he's a Palace fan is irrelevant here -any reporter would have had something similar.

I'm not saying it's because he's a palace fan. For me it was simply that the pre-amble didn't fit with the match description. While it had to be filed after the match, he clearly sat through a first 15 minutes where palace were restricted to one blocked shot, saw brighton create two good chances, one of which could have been a penalty, saw palace get a penalty just before half time. We know this because that's how he described the game. How can he sit through that and prepare a 'palace played them off the park' intro? How can he see what he described as an improved performance from Brighton in the second half, during which the first notable chance he mentions is Dunk's attempt. The first notable action of the econd half from palace in his description of the match comes 15 minutes from time.

I get that the article is an 'in progress' thing, so it can be filed as soon after the match finishes as possible, but he describes a very even match when describing the action, and a last minute goal, while changing the result, doesn't change the action that came before, it doesn't cause a dominant performance to suddenly become a tight affair. If you have 70% possession, 20 chances, and your opponents score an equaliser in the last minute with their first attack it doesn't become an even match. You still dominated. Similarly, if there are similar possession stats, similar attacking stats (shots, shots on goal, xg) throughout the game, it's a tight game whether an equaliser comes in injury time or not.

I think it goes back to my previous point about the atmosphere generated by fans warping perception. I just find it odd that he can also write a pretty accurate reflection of the match that resisted that warping, while also being affected by it in the pre-amble.